34.1.1 and 34.1.2 tells us it has to be in the character of the town. That is not being met.

34.3 states the maximum height of any building and structure is 60 feet. The developer’s first formal request was 9 stories . Either they were targeting little people for the development or they totally disregarded the rules. Shame on P&Z for not denying that proposal at the time of submission and making the resident spend their hard earned money to fight what P&Z should of protected us from.

34.4 talks about an informal meeting prior to the submission of a formal application. That did take place. The developer presented a 5 to 6 story residential building. The developer and their lawyer knows what the rules are regarding height and totally disregarded them, basically saying they don’t care about the rules. Are we now going to reward that type of deceit?

In Section 31 I find this to be quite interesting:

31.4.3 Neighborhood: The site plan and architectural plans shall be of a character to be harmonize with the neighborhood, to accomplish a transition in character values and to preserve and enhance the appearance and beauty of the community. When 450+ people sit through close to 3 hours from the developer with a plan that was never legal to start with, it shows no harmony. You can’t build trust when you start with lies. How does having a farm across the street and a single family neighborhood with a historic colonial road, blue dot trail and vernal ponds surrounding the site transition to 405 renters with no value of ownership and 500,000+ of retail work. The facts are it does not. It is all about money and how much money they can make off the backs of the resident who will lose value economically.

Here is the ones that I think gives P&Z the power to deny this application without the fear of being sued for looking out for the best interest of the citizens the represent.

33.4 General Considerations: In addition to any additional standards for particular uses hereinafter specified, the zoning commission shall consider the following before acting on any special exception application.

33.4.1 The size and intensity of the proposed use. At the January 12th informal hearing the commission were worried about the intensity and stated it on the record. Is 45 apartments really that much less that the intensity is still not an issue?

33.4.2 The effect of the proposed use on any comprehensive plan of development for the city. Did the city not buy land for the development of of some open space and for future development of a trail? Is that plan that spent city money, time and human resources no longer viable when money is on the line?

33.4.3 The capacity of adjacent and feeder streets to accommodate peak traffic loads and any hazards created by this use. What adjacent and feeder streets? ONE STREET! Bridgeport Avenue is already overcrowded and proven to be deadly. Ask the families of those lost or severely injured on this road. Knowing this alone makes any taxes gained blood money in my eyes.

33.4.4 The effects on property values and taxable values in the neighborhood, taking into account the topography of the lot and and the character, location and height of proposed buildings, walls, stacks, fences, grades and landscaping. The developer spent a lot of time explaining market values of their proposed development. What we don’t see is market study showing the reduced values of the entire neighborhood. And yes I can say our entire city as we will lose everything that makes us great. The city may feel this is a tax bonanza. What if 100’s or even 1,000’s of homeowners demand a tax credit based on the loss of value of their homes?